Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Guest posts

Guest post: 'The Sun has shown how little respect it has for women'

184 replies

MumsnetGuestPosts · 22/01/2015 14:45

If you were in any doubt that The Sun hates women, doubt no more. Two days ago it allowed its sister paper, The Times, to run a report claiming Page Three would no longer be a feature of the tabloid. Today it mocked all those who had been taken in by it. While such mockery took the form of a media in-joke ("We would like to apologise on behalf of the print and broadcast journalists who have spent the last two days talking and writing about us") it’s clear that the stunt had another, crueller target: all the women who have been campaigning against Page Three, women who had been permitted to think, for just one moment, that their voices mattered.

It is, of course, a show of power. The Sun giveth respect, The Sun taketh it away. It’s reminiscent of the way in which teenage boys taunt girls to hide their own insecurity. He says he loves you, then three days later he’s laughing with his mates, telling you it was all for a dare. It’s a form of cruelty which can leave you feeling humiliated, as though you are to blame for having dared to believe that someone male could have appreciated your human worth. You know that sexism isn't your fault but it still makes you feel like a loser. In a world in which value is determined by the male gaze, it’s so easy to end up feeling worthless.

One of feminism’s biggest challenges remains persuading downhearted women that even the little things matter, if for no other reason than because we matter. While some things – male violence, rape conviction statistics, female poverty rates – are clear and measurable, other things – those that contribute to the drip-drip effect of dehumanisation – are dismissed as either unimportant or not real sexism, anyway. Page 3 has always been one such thing. I'm old enough to remember Clare Short campaigning against it in the 1980s and my main response then was one of embarrassment. Why didn't this woman give it a rest? They’re only breasts! Didn't she know how silly she was making the rest of us look? It took me 30 years to put her campaign – and my own dismissive attitude towards it – into any broader context. Nevertheless, I'm hopeful that young women today won’t need quite so long.

The schoolboy meanness of The Sun’s latest stunt has not gone unnoticed. Indeed, the misogyny that drives it is striking. The message to women is "you might be more than just objects, but that makes treating you like one all the more fun". We’re used to all the excuses regarding Page 3. It’s just a pretty woman. It’s just naked flesh. Are you jealous? Maybe you’re some prude who doesn't like sex. Anyhow, what about FGM? Shouldn't you be campaigning against that? Until yesterday, there was always that tiny space for doubt. There isn't any more, though. The Sun has made the link between casual objectification and contempt for women absolutely clear. The little things do matter after all.

Ultimately what The Sun did this week helps us to join the dots. It sends a radicalising message to women who may not otherwise have cared about such things. Whereas we might have thought casual misogyny could never bleed from the page into real life, we now know better. In many ways, this knowledge is more valuable that the concession we thought we were being offered two days ago. Perhaps, in the long run, we will find ourselves thanking The Sun.

OP posts:
livefastlove · 25/01/2015 16:40

Well the Sun has taken a step back towards the pervy 1970s groper attitudes of the original page 3. It's getting to be like one of those embarrassing elderly uncles at a family party.

PurdeyBirdie · 25/01/2015 17:42

I also have a problem with Page 3 in that men don't seem to have evolved since they rutted in caves. Tits are tits are tits are tits, surely? How boring is Page 3? However, we keep pretending that the little lambs posing coquettishly with their nubile tits out are painfully unaware - victims even - of the horrid patriarchal cog driving the pages of the ragmag they're trying to sexually titivate men from. These women don't give a shiny shit about the big bad wolves holding back feminism; they want their tits to be slobbered over; they want the fifteen minutes of fame, hell..perhaps they'll even get a porn movie out of this gig, right?

I don't have to perv over the shoulders of teenage girls to know that a vast number of them - yes! even the daughters of some of your mates! - are getting their tits out for any number of lads who say the right thing. The sexualisation of our young people is what feminists should be tackling - and that includes the insidious likes of Madonna, that bloody porn star, Rihanna, Miley Cyrus and all the other pop-whores who are ruining our children with their example.

PurdeyBirdie · 25/01/2015 17:44

*getting their tits out on social media is what I meant there.

YonicScrewdriver · 25/01/2015 17:56

"The sexualisation of our young people is what feminists should be tackling"

Ok dokey, after you.

livefastlove · 25/01/2015 17:57

But surely The Sun is part of the problem Purdey with their safe, sanitised version that is fine for all the family.

PuffinsAreFictitious · 25/01/2015 18:07

Um, feminists are tackling it. By trying to get rid of something so ubiquitous that it has lead to a seriously distorted view of human sexuality. This in turn has lead to young women thinking that selfies of their breasts is a way to get/keep a young man, and lets young men think they have a right to see young women's breasts.

By getting rid of Pg3, ditching the lad's mags, it takes away one avenue of normalisation. Which, hopefully, eventually will mean men won't be able to lean over young girl's shoulders on the bus to get a view of their boob selfies anymore. Sorry entitled people.

SardineQueen · 25/01/2015 18:26

"pop-whores"?

Jesus.

I find it not very surprising that the people who use really horrible language and make really sweeping judgements about women on this thread are people who are pro page 3.

YonicScrewdriver · 25/01/2015 18:26

Yy SQ.

BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 25/01/2015 18:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SardineQueen · 25/01/2015 18:31

And again, my problem with Page 3 is not the women modelling. It is the men who use their images to harass / upset / intimidate women and girls.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

PuffinsAreFictitious · 25/01/2015 18:36

And fuck... I really need to stop skimming posts, because that Purdey, was some of the worst misogyny I've seen on MN since DD was booted.

I hope MNHQ leaves it where it is. It shows in simple language exactly what men like you really think of women.

And what I said before, you poor, porn sick weirdo.

grimbletart · 25/01/2015 18:37

I can't get an online link from the S Telegraph for this but Stephanie Marrian, the first topless page 3 girl in 1970, said in the paper today that it is time to get rid of it it because has such a negative impact on girls' aspirations. "I don't think it is a good career path".

SauceForTheGander · 25/01/2015 19:43

And again, my problem with Page 3 is not the women modelling. It is the men who use their images to harass / upset / intimidate women and girls.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Yes Sardine This debate has been about the women who protest against P3 and the women who model. Attempts made to pit us against each other & to turn it into some kind of puritanical class war. Little analysis of the men who have

  1. made lots of money out page 3
  2. abuse the protestors online
  3. have used page 3 to intimidate and abuse
  4. or the impact 44 yrs of page 3 has had on male entitlement to young women's bodes.
YonicScrewdriver · 25/01/2015 19:49

Puffins, I think Purdey is female.

Agree with the rest of your post though.

PuffinsAreFictitious · 25/01/2015 19:51

Really? Bloody hell!

scallopsrgreat · 25/01/2015 20:07

"The sexualisation of our young people is what feminists should be tackling. " Err yes. That's what NMP3 is all about. It is all part of the same spectrum.

Something that hasn't been mentioned is how narrow a definition of 'sexy topless beauty' The Sun has. Very rarely women of colour, all slim, all young. Also it creates the impression that women are just interchangeable, breast-carrying objects. If you think that isn't adding to the sexualisation of girls then I'd think again.

PurdeyBirdie · 25/01/2015 20:53

Yes, I am a woman and no, I do not agree with Page 3. I don't see my language as misogynistic when used to describe the soft porn antics of Rihanna. She and her ilk are a disgrace to women and I fear for my baby daughter in ten year's time.

Olbasaddict · 25/01/2015 20:54

Is Purdey on some sort of mission to fit the word tits into as many of her posts as possible? It's hard to take someone who talks like that seriously.

SardineQueen · 25/01/2015 20:56

When fearing for your daughters I don't think your main concern needs to be Rhianna Confused

scallopsrgreat · 25/01/2015 21:02

You don't thnk 'whore' is misogynistic?

It is.

PurdeyBirdie · 25/01/2015 21:11

I know it doesn't suit your agenda to address the antics of some of the world's biggest female stars but 'pop-whores' was my way of minimising the prostitution of their own bodies to make as much money as they can swindle out of young people.

Sardine, you don't sound very sisterly. Why so vicious? And you, Puffin, why so nasty?

Olbas, if I want to say tits, i'll say tits. It's called freedom of speech (plus Trinny & Susannah say it loads so it must be okay).

PuffinsAreFictitious · 25/01/2015 21:13

I don't see my language as misogynistic

And yet, everyone else does.

It must be because we are all fat, humourless, liberal Lefties that we struggle to understand you because you are so gloriously un-PC.

Or something.

BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 25/01/2015 21:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

scallopsrgreat · 25/01/2015 21:30

I don't understand why Sardine was being unsisterly Confused. I think she was just pointing out Rihanna isn't the biggest threat to your daughter. The men who consume this this type of sexualisation are a bigger threat. Why is that unsisterly or vicious?

Can you stop calling women whores, Purdey. Whore is a word made up by men purely to disparage women. There is no equivalent for men. That is vicious.

PuffinsAreFictitious · 25/01/2015 22:11

My apologies if you feel I was nasty to you. However, I am only able to judge you on your words, and your words got the reaction the deserved Purdey. It might be an idea to rethink your position, we get most of our ideas about the world from our parents.....